Thursday, May 29, 2008

Cooking, Like Life and Keeping a Blog, Is Hard

I have been terrible, dear readers, with keeping up with the blog as of late. One explanation, though not an excuse, is that I am now commuting back and forth from my place of business in New York to my place of residence in far-away New Jersey. Another is that I have not been contemplating my own existence lately. That ends now.

What have I been up to lately? Well, this past weekend, I evacuated my apartment. I say evacuated because it was quick and poorly organized, though appropriately done, and has resulted in a great deal of cleanup after the fact where all of my stuff currently resides back at home with my parents. After that was Memorial Day, which consisted of me playing with my sister's children ad exausteum (nope, not a word) and then consuming unhealthy amounts of meat. In fact, I would say that was a theme for the weekend. Ethics aside, each helping of processed meat beef was delicious. Normally I do not eat meat, but sadly, not because of a moral inclination on my part, but instead because it was too expensive for me to buy when I was living alone. Now, my parents buy the meat, so I eat whatever they put in front of me. And hey, if hot dogs and hamburgers are not present at a Memorial Day cookout, something's not right.

As a side note, Memorial Day isn't about patriotism, my sister informed me, but about honoring those who died. She's right, of course, but that does not preclude me from shivering at the sight of the American flag, even if it accompanies delicious beef. In spite of that, I had a lovely time.

Then began the week of work and three hours of commuting every day, which is decidedly not fun, not to mention this week and next are the longest in recorded history. You see, readers, after next Sunday, I will be living full-time with my girlfriend of nearly two years. First with my parents, and then with hers, but by then we will begin our lives together - and that is a reason to celebrate. I see the light at the end of the tunnel, but still I must work, which is... hard.

Beyond commuting, which is hard enough, I am getting discouraged by my lack of abilities. The thing I am focusing on currently is cooking. I cannot cook, and I think it's because of my undiagnosed attention deficit disorder. Basically, I start cooking, I get distracted, I try once again to reel myself in and focus, I do something for 5 minutes, and then I am back to not paying any heed of the boiling/steaming/sauteeing mess on the stove for which I am responsible.

I tried to make rice on Tuesday night, figuring I would bring in rice and beans (possibly in honor of Rent) to work. Sadly, I cannot for the life of me get the proportions of water to rice down to make an acceptable pot of rice. It either comes out burned or overcooked and pudding-like. After I failed once again, I had about a pound of terrible rice to deal with and decided to try to make fried rice. The recipe was near the stove, and I decided not to follow it at all and, naturally, I managed to make an eggy, soy-sauce-ey, oily pan of mush unacceptable to any human being. I became enraged and vowed not to cook until I stopped being an idiot.

I thought to myself, maybe I simply needed inspiration. I decided to pick up the nightstand book Aphrodite by Isabel Allende, which is exciting, intoxicating, and totally hot. This, however, made me want to burn calories, not put them together into an interesting dish. Sigh. At least the book is nearly over.

Part of growing up is facing the truth about yourself. One of those truths may be that I am not interested in cooking. I rarely enjoy it when I am alone, because I cook to feed myself, not out of pleasure. If it is mixed with something else, perhaps time with friends or a romantic activity, it's fun, but otherwise, I do not truly possess a love of food. I like good food, but I'm not a foodie.

Another truth is that I have no attention span. Work is hard for me. I wish I could have been born a more gifted athlete so I could be a professional soccer player. I seriously believe that was my calling, and somewhere along the line, I veered off course. Thus, I am forced to discover something else in which I take as much pleasure as soccer.

I'm tired of being asked what I'll be doing after I leave New York. I still am no closer to discovering my path than I was a week ago, so please, stop asking. I'm back to being depressed and pessimistic about my career, so I will be thriving on my personal life while I struggle to reconcile my dreams with reality. At least I still have dreams. And after all, I've managed to see the light at the end of my relationship tunnel. It's only a matter of time before I start to see the end of the next large tunnel in work life, right?

Luckily, or somewhat sadly, depending on how you look at it, at the age of 22, time is really what I have.

Saturday, May 24, 2008

Love and Marriage

After California legalized gay marriage, every conservative has been rushing to get their name at the top of the list of people who hate gays.

The column that takes the cake for me is the one I read today. This woman was a writer from the Ethics and Public Policy center, a Catholic conservative think tank of crap manufactured to tow the party line. The column argued that the problem with gay marriage is that it is a break from the traditional marriage, and the traditional marriage and family is the backbone of our healthy society. Marriage isn’t discriminatory, she said, but it exists because that is the situation that benefits the human species and is necessary for reproduction. Anything else is unnatural.

Now, let’s think about this for a second. First premise: traditional marriage. Traditional marriage had nothing to do with the fact that it is a good situation for kids. Marriage came about as a way to own women. Kids came out of those property exchanges, and then the women were stuck in them with a second kind of adhesive. When women had no right to divorce, women had to work at saving relationships. Maybe that’s why they call it “making it work.” If you’re forced to be somewhere you don’t want to be, they call it work.

Secondly, to the argument that (and stop me if you’ve heard this one) gay marriage is “unnatural.” Basically, our entire society comes not from nature, but a creation of our collective imagination, innovation, and, yes, evolution. Perhaps that argument doesn’t hold water for these esteemed thinkers because they don’t believe in evolution. That aside, these people haven’t changed in 200 years, when they first began arguing against interracial marriage.

I have to say, homosexuality is not an invention of modern times. For many thousands of years, literature from less prudish cultures and eras than the European tradition has documented many, many homosexual relationships throughout the ages. These people who claim homosexuality, or homo eroticism, even, to be unnatural are suppressing it within themselves. Let’s face it: most of us have had homosexual attractions. I know many, many people who have had same-sex attractions or love interests who may or may not have acted upon them.

That aside, let’s think of it another way. WHO CARES? Why do these people invest so much time and energy into butting into everyone else’s lives? And if marriage is weakened, who cares? It wasn’t started to make people happy; it began as a way to control women and exchange property. We have come a long way since then; so should the “sacred” union of marriage.

Which brings me to another interesting discussion: why is it that couples who live together before marriage have higher rates of divorce than couples who do not? Is it because many people who live together decide that they should eventually get married for financial reasons? Is it because “relationship inertia,” as I heard it described brilliantly by a co-worker today?

I really don’t know the answer to this question, but I have to say, I think marriage is outdated and stupid. I mean, it’s great if you’re living with someone to whom you are completely committed and in love with to be able to make that publicly known. However, marriage as an institution for society as a whole is incompatible with the modern world.

People have always stayed in marriages for many of the wrong reasons, like financial ones or cultural ones. Now, people are still entering into marriages for the wrong reasons, like family pressure or for tax breaks. Marriage is seen as the “logical next step,” and it would seem that the term itself is a harbinger of doom. It’s so weighted, and then there are all those absolutes. “’Til DEATH do you part. FOR-E-VER.” I mean, who wouldn’t be scared of that? There are plenty of reasons why people should get out of marriages, like abuse or infidelity. The thing is, most people take on marriage now without really meaning it. It’s not modern relationships that are causing this devaluation of marriage, but society. It’s so commercial. It’s about a dress, a huge party, and a big-old ring. Love is so romanticized, and it’s cheapened in the process. It’s not always like it is in the movies, and I think that’s hard for everyone to deal with.

And the truth is, it’s these same depressed, lonely, and hateful conservatives who are creating a world in which marriage is destined to fail – and they’re making a lot of money in the process. So, while they’re sitting in their townhouses telling gays to go back into the closet and admonishing the demise of traditional institutions, they could really care less.

All the courts in California said last week is that gay people are the same as straight people. They have every right to be as miserable as the rest of the people of this fine country. It’s about rights. To be honest, I wish we were fighting a more relevant battle; this one’s like fighting to be granted a seat on a crashing plane.

I’m completely in love, and I may get married someday, but I don’t need this meaningless institution to solidify my relationship. All I need is Uncle Sam’s tax benefit. Since I’m moving to California, HAND IT OVER.

Monday, May 19, 2008

Traffic and Trafficking

I read an article in The New Yorker magazine about human trafficking. Wow, was it depressing. Basically, it exemplifies the idea of women as commodities for free trading around the world. Their bodies - or more appropriately, physiologies - are routinely degraded, devalued, and dehumanized for sex or the idea of sex. Part of me read this article in the, "Shame on the rest of the world for being so evil" point of view, but at the end, I thought to myself, "Shame on all of us."

The things we tolerate as women, and even propagate, in terms of patriarchy, are unreal. There are people out there who still don't believe in marital rape. There are daily infringements on our reproductive freedoms (women = baby machines), constant images of women as sex objects in advertisements from everything from perfume to beer to movies to fast food meals. My favorite manifestation of late, and my favorite topic of conversation around this daily humiliation, is the Heineken ads with the robotic woman-keg. Basically, this is advertised as the perfect woman: big breasts, big hips, without a personality or free will, and she pumps alcohol. Wow, great. The way this and arguably every society around the world treats women is despicable, and it leads to a culture in which human sex trafficking is allowed to continue. If women were respected everywhere, it would not be able to happen.

All or most of the women in the article wound up in Dubai as sex slaves. This would make perfect sense if Dubai were some hole-in-the-wall place out of the sights of the world (like if no one had ever heard of it), but it's not. It's one of the wealthiest, if not the wealthiest, cities in the wealthiest country in the world. Tons of US and other international corporations have huge stakes in Dubai, and many US universities are considering setting up international campuses there. This is a place where rich people go to play and free enterprise reigns, so it is no wonder that those same rich people pay a ton of money for sex with abused, illegal prostitutes. It is also no wonder that in a country where oppression of women is the norm, victims of trafficking are arrested instead of aided.

I think this all really gets back to not only our devaluation of women, but our complete and utter dependency on oil. This, of course, brings me to traffic.

There are too many people in New York. I cannot wait to leave this place. I took a long bike ride on Saturday, which would have been fine, but I rarely had an opportunity to glide uninterrupted through the streets because there was always some car not paying attention about ready to kill anyone with slower reaction times on a bike. It's a jungle out there, and they're all driving huge cars. You'd think with gas prices these people would stay home, but one should never underestimate the American impulse to get out and burn fossil fuels. It's amazing.

To conclude: stop human trafficking - ride your bikes.

Friday, May 16, 2008

Gay Marriage and Abortion, All in One Day

The California Supreme Court yesterday overturned an injunction placed on gay marriages in San Francisco, ruling that bans on gay marriages are unconstitutional and discriminate against homosexuals. My girlfriend called me as soon as she heard about the ruling to make sure I heard and to tell me she loved me. "Isn't it great we're moving to California?" she said. Yes, it is great. Perfect timing. Of course, many friends e-mailed me, asking if they heard wedding bells for the two of us, but really what this means it that we can take things as quickly or as slowly as straight couples. The point is, we will have all of the options everyone else has, and that's awesome. This came in the afternoon of an already good day, and after that, it kept getting better.

I walked over to Grand Central to catch the train to the New York Academy of Sciences for an awards ceremony honoring abortion providers. The main award went to Dr. Mildred Hanson, a woman from Minneapolis, MN who has been providing abortions for 50 years. Before Roe v. Wade made abortion legal, Dr. Hanson practiced within the hospital system, working to get women safe, legal abortions. Before Roe, if you could prove you were crazy and a danger to yourself or others, you were allowed to get a legal abortion. Dr. Hanson was on her hospital's abortion committee, and she saw many desperate women in the days before legal abortion. In the documentary I promote as part of PRCH, Voices of Choice, Dr. Hanson tells a moving story of a young woman who called her in the middle of the night, desperately in need of an abortion. Dr. Hanson told her what to do to get one, but she later found out that the girl had killed herself. "To this day, I feel responsible for her death," she explains in the film.

At the awards ceremony, she told another incredibly moving story about a woman in Minnesota who died of sepsis as a result of an illegal abortion. The mortician came to drain the body of blood and placed the body over the heating grates, deeming that the best space to do so. The woman's children were upstairs, and when they looked down, they saw their dead mother being drained of blood. Horrific, and a gruesome reminder of the importance of protecting women's health and lives by keeping abortion safe and legal.

Despite these grim scenes and stories, the night was incredibly gratifying. I've never been more proud to work for a pro-choice organization, or of being pro-choice. These abortion providers were amazing. Dr. Susan Wicklund, the author of This Common Secret: My Journey as an Abortion Doctor, gave the keynote address, and she was moving and inspiring, as were all of the guests. Among them were Dr. Curtis Boyd, the doctor whose clinic was burned to the ground in New Mexico in December. He received special recognition for his battles and efforts while Dr. Hanson received the William K. Rashbaum Abortion Provider Award for dedication to women's health, the main award of the night. In the audience was Dr. George Tiller, the abortion provider in Kansas who has been embroiled in a legal witch hunt by anti-choice activists for over a year as he provides abortions up until the third trimester. He won the award last year, and he gave a moving address introducing Dr. Hanson as his mentor and constant reminder of the importance of this fight and this facet of healthcare. Also in the audience was Rev. Howard Moody, founder of the Clergy Consultation Service. The CCS was a network of clergy that investigated doctors to make sure they provided safe abortions and made referrals to women in need of abortions before Roe. He has been dubbed the "Harriet Tubman" of abortion. In addition to these big names a room full of other abortion providers and women's health advocates, heroes in their own rights. It was an amazing atmosphere of solidarity and celebration for those who provide the most stigmatized medical practice in human history.

I think my favorite part of the night was when Dr. Wicklund read excerpts from the PRCH website (the Why I Provide brochure) from members talking about their views of being abortion providers and experiences with patients. One doctor wrote that it was the only field where you fundamentally change women's lives for the better, heal them mentally and physically, and that abortion patients are the only ones who send thank-you letters. Another talked about how gratifying it was to care for women and help them through the most difficult chapters in their lives, giving them a new lease on life and a rebirth. Women's health providers and those who provide abortions love caring for women and their families. Dr. Hanson mentioned that abortion is a normal part of a woman's life, and that giving these women safe care means ensuring her children have a mother, ensuring her parents have a daughter. These doctors watched women die from the consequences of illegal abortion; they know that what they do makes for better families and a better society, and they know it is a public health necessity.

I was so moved by all of those speeches, and I'm still crying about them, but I couldn't help but think about the people out there whose sole purpose is wiping these people off of the map. It was a woman who shot George Tiller and nearly killed him, and abortion providers face dangers every day of their lives. Their families are threatened, their clinics are burned, all because they give women options to control their lives, have children when they can, and give some the compassion and care that they deserve during incredibly traumatic experiences. If you love women, you must believe in a woman's right to full healthcare, including abortion. During the times of illegal abortion, which millions of women around the world still live today, families lost their mothers, sisters, aunts, wives, and daughters. We cannot go back to those times here in the United States.

This event, in addition to the gay marriage decision, made me think about our politicians. Many of the articles after the California ruling centered around how it would reignite the political debate about gay marriage, which could hurt the Democrats. None of the presidential candidates, Democrat or Republican, support gay marriage, though Obama and Clinton support civil unions. All of these politicians will not stand up for equality but avoid these issues like the plague. That goes for abortion, too. They have never heard the stories I heard last night and throughout my tenure at PRCH from abortion doctors who put their lives on the line for women's health and rights, or if they have, they hide them in veils of secrecy.

Some day, I want a politician who stands up and talks about the importance of abortion, instead of just saying they're pro-choice. Some day, I want a president who works to end discrimination in the public square and supports the rights of all people to love and express that love just like anyone else. I want to live in a society where frank and honest discussion of freedom goes beyond debates over gun rights or the rights of bigots to say the "n" word.

That society has yet to be born, but I hope I'm in the delivery room when it is.

Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Ideology and Insanity

A woman got on my subway train today and began to cite the ways we could all get into heaven. Mostly, her theory was, as you can probably guess, to worship Jesus Christ. After her loud and brilliantly-timed announcement (between Queensboro Plaza and 59th and Lex), which I got a special seat for because she was standing right next to me, she sat down in a seat by the window and began reading out loud to herself from the Bible, singing to herself, smiling... and basically acting crazy. Now, if she weren't reading from a Bible and instead reading from, oh I don't know, the Communist Manifesto or the latest novel by Danielle Steel, she'd be nuts. Of course, I don't think that the reaction on the train would be different, but I think in many places in the US, she'd even be admired.

I suppose this makes me an atheist. This woman has an imaginary friend who makes her run around subways screaming about someone, reading out loud to herself, and swaying to the gospel songs playing in her head. Nuts, right? Nope, just devout; no, really, crazy.

There are "pro-life" (anti-choice is what we call them in the pro-choice arena) people protesting in front of Planned Parenthood clinics in Wisconsin now protesting the pill. "The pill kills babies," they say. Now, I guess I should have seen this coming, but I guess in my heart of hearts, I didn't want it to be true. Sadly, it is. Now, these people: also nuts. Wrong, first of all, but that's not the point. They aren't going to pharmacies to protest condoms because they go on penises, which belong to men. They only go to places of women's health to protest women's health measures: mainly birth control and abortion.

Birth control kills because it might prevent implantation of an embryo, which I don't think it does, but let's leave that aside. They only care about women taking care of their lives. Sex, you see, is morally sinful, even though entirely natural, as is masturbation, and thus women should remain pregnant their entire lives if they choose to have sex. Sex is only allowed when conceiving children. So if you happen not to conceive, does that mean that you are sinning? Since pregnancy results statistically so rarely, are billions of women on a freight train bound for hell? Men, of course - go have all the sex you want.

On top of all this, these people also don't want anyone knowing about sex. Nope, it doesn't happen; abstinence is the key. Abstinence from what, you say? Stop asking questions. I'll have none of it.

Come on, these people are not just religious, they are CRAZY! Why can't we simply call a spade a spade? They believe in an imaginary force that will come down and smite us, and they think they are going to the happy place for shouting slurs at poor women walking out of health clinics. They're not morally righteous, they are just plain wrong - and they are CRAZY.

Monday, May 12, 2008

Unmitigated Disasters

No, I'm not talking about my job search. I'm talking about Myanmar and China. Is it just me, or has the whole world gone to hell in the past like 10 days? Yes, I know, I live in the United States and even with gas being really expensive, I still have rose-colored glasses for the poverty and dire straits of the majority of the human community. Still, I think things have gone from bad to worse in the past two weeks.

For those of you not up on the news (but read my blog... ok, so maybe that's no one), a huge cyclone hit Myanmar about 10 days ago, and now the death toll has reached 32,000 people. The government, an illegal military junta whose only apparent allies are China and Thailand (and even they probably don't like them very much), refuses to let disaster relief agencies and NGOs unfettered access into the country to give aid to the desperate, starving people. They are afraid someone will kick them out of power. Now, here's what I don't understand. Apparently over the weekend, they had a referendum on whether or not these guys can stay in power. Of course, any opposition is brutally oppressed, like the Buddhist monks beaten some years ago for protesting the dictatorship. Thus, the vote was probably not honest. No shock there - as if without the cyclone it would have been honest. But the real thing that confuses me about this whole thing is this: wouldn't they look much better as a government if they LET PEOPLE INTO THE COUNTRY TO HELP THE CITIZENS NOT DIE? I mean, I get the whole iron-grip-on-power thing, but if the people weren't pissed off at them enough, now they're letting them die by the thousands. Think they're going to be happy about that? I predict, if the international community doesn't launch a humanitarian attack (yes, you heard me) first, a massive riot and political upheaval possibly in the next year. A people cannot stand being oppressed and denied basic human rights for very long. I would venture a guess that they wouldn't mow down the entire population of a country, and I think it's fair to say that there are more people than government officials. I'd take the public in that fight.

The second disaster was a massive - 7.9 on the Richter scale - earthquake in the Sichuan province of China. China, contrary to previous disasters, has been pretty upfront about the problems they now have with regard to rescue operations, and they have even been (we think) honest about the death toll. I think it's pretty obvious they are feeling international pressure to speak plainly about their need - if they have it - for aid considering a) the Myanmar situation and b) the upcoming Olympics. Perhaps people will be kinder to China if they open up a little. This is very good PR for an isolated, repressive society. Now, if only they'd extend their openness to human rights abuses and get to work on fixing them up. After cleaning up after the quake, I suppose that's the next item on their agenda.

While the US might previously have been in a position to launch an assault on Myanmar to forcefully get aid workers in to help the people, with American troops overstretched around the world and in Iraq, we are paralyzed, at least should it come to an out-and-out military conflict with the Burmese government. I guess it shows that one unmitigated disaster - Iraq - prohibits us from preventing another unmitigated disaster - Myanmar.

Of course, considering how well we did in aiding Katrina victims, other countries have every right to not want US involvement in their disasters. Yes, our own unmitigated disaster, and things are still not normal down there more than two years later. Our very own cyclone of epic proportions. Now, imagine if the world community had decided to invade the US because our government was not doing enough for the victims of that hurricane... Imagine if US citizens had risen up to overthrow our government in the wake of such inaction and ineptitude. What would have happened then?

Thursday, May 8, 2008

Like a Fine Wine


Very interesting New York Times article about wine and recent pot shots that critics have taken at oenophiles. Wine "snobs" certainly have their weaknesses, Eric Asimov writes. Some studies have shown that some people (among which I count myself) think wines that are more expensive taste better. It is hard to sell the cheapest wine on the menu, restaurant owners explain, because people do not want to seem cheap or uncultured. The more expensive wines must be better. Other studies have shown that cheaper wines actually outperformed more expensive wines in taste tests.

His article, however, brings into light the fact that wine free of context is difficult to discriminate. That is to say, wines taste better - or worse - depending on the situation. Case in point: I bought a wine the summer after my junior year of college. It was a Concannon Petit Syrah, 2004 (I believe). It was $15. This is the typical price I pay for wines. I stick to the $12 to $25 range, thinking that these wines are pretty consistently decent. With few exceptions, I have been right. In any case, I bought this wine and brought it home to drink that night with the woman I had been courting all summer. That wine tasted delicious as finally she caved to my obvious advances - and let me tell you, that was the BEST wine I've ever tasted.

The following week, she and I went to the grocery store to buy wine, and we both wanted the wine that had tasted so good that memorable night. We happily bought it, eager to reap the same enjoyment... and it fell flat on its face. It had tasted so good before - what had changed? I can tell you: the thrill, the novelty, the anticipation was gone, and it had nothing to do with the wine. Thus, my scientific conclusion: wine is not as good divorced of a good context.

Wine knowledge is not easy to come by, and even harder to remember. Do I like merlots? Do I like zinfindels? Which year was supposed to be good for California pinot noirs or Italian chianti? True, I rarely buy the cheapest wine on the menu, but that has begun to change. I've tried a lot of wines, and I'm starting to understand what I like. If that means I go for the $40 bottle and you think I'm being snobby, then ignore it - stop judging. There is a reason I'm making the purchase. I ask for recommendations, I read, I sample, and I try to make educated choices - but really, I do not need to justify my actions. I'm an adult - deal with your insecurities on your own time. If I like an $8 bottle more than a $20 bottle, it does not mean I am an ignoramus. The same goes for me liking a $40 bottle over a $15. Something is motivating me to buy that particular wine, and it's OK. So there! (Can you tell I'm a little insecure?)

I'm currently reading a book by Isabel Allende entitled Aphrodite. My girlfriend pointed out that I had not finished the book before I put it on my profile as one of my favorites, but there's a reason for that. I liked it 15 pages in, and I do not anticipate that changing. If I like a book because it moves me to cook or turns me on, then chances are, I'm going to keep liking it. Don't judge me based on how or why I like a book - I'm allowed to put it on my list, even if I've only read the introduction. (I mean, I didn't just judge the book by its cover... at least I made it inside.)

The book is really about not being judgmental about food or sex. If cinnamon works for you, then it works for you. If you need saffron to get your juices flowing, fine. There can be aphrodisiacs in any number of foods, and it also largely depends on context, love being the big one.

I've recently been buying books like that. One, The Whole Lesbian Sex Book, spends page after page telling the reader it's OK to be interested in things that are beyond the "norm" of your sexuality. It's fine to be interested in things that are frowned upon by better, more loyal gay people. If you fantasize about sex with Brad Pitt, embrace it and have fun with it.

The point is, readers, that you have a right to your preferences. Does it really matter that there is a better wine out there for cheaper? You could be fully educated on the joys of fish eggs and still not like caviar. And it's the same with wine. If you don't like $2 wines because they're not interesting, though entirely drinkable, that's fine - and that goes for those who only buy wines that cost more than $20, too. Stop feeling guilty, and embrace life to the fullest (or lightest, if that's what you're into).

Wednesday, May 7, 2008

Gender and Politics

You know, I'm a sucker for reading articles that do little but confirm my previously held beliefs. I dislike reading things that challenge my views. However, I especially like it when articles that are brilliant say things that I have been saying. Of course, it makes me wonder, "Why didn't I write that?" That aside, however, it is incredibly life-affirming. It makes me feel like I have not had my head in the sand.

This is how I feel about "Post-Hillary Feminism," from the April 21, 2008 edition of New York Magazine, by Amanda Fortini. In discussing how gender played into this election and how women felt about Hillary's candidacy, it nails it. It is a phenomenal read, and though depressing at best, it ends happily, like all good magazine articles. She even articulated that wish that Senator Clinton would make an Obama-style speech on gender and sexism, and she gave voice to all the women out there who wanted it, too. I no longer feel alone in wanting to lash out at the political pundits or people who just don't get that sexism exists in a real way in this country. But is it true, what she says in the article? Is it the case that Hillary's campaign has been an awakening of a kind not seen in 30 years?

I have to be a little less optimistic than she is on this point. She leaves it open for the reader to speculate about what will come out of Mrs. Clinton's now seemingly doomed candidacy, but I suspect that nothing will. The few times sexism was pointed out in this campaign, despite its constant presence, was entirely obliterated by talk of national race issues and the likes of Jeremiah Wright. Women were once again ignored as a demographic in this country, and the dilemma that I'm sure many black women faced when choosing between Clinton and Obama was not discussed in enough detail if at all. People were much more likely to talk about race than sex, and the media buttressed those race discussions. Not so for gender. Like she says in her article, women who talk about gender all the time are denounced as hollering, whiny feminazis. Those who speak of race in a frank way are enlightened.

I think the thing I took away from her article was a sense of having a right to see gender bias wherever I go. I have a right to point out sexism to my friends and constantly try to raise consciousness. I have a right to glare or call out every man who stares at my breasts before he looks at my face. More importantly, I have a right not to be stared at at all. I have a right not to be called sweetie by every older man with whom I have contact. I have a right to be upset.

I do not want to work at something where I have to hide my feminist side. Make me a professional feminist. Better yet, make me a happy professional - and keep me a feminist. Those making a real difference are those who talk about these things constantly - and not just in academia. I have to stick it out and become a professional and talk about gender as much as I talk about politics. After all, they are completely inseparable.

Tuesday, May 6, 2008

Superheroes and Superdelegates

I was glad to hear today that people are overestimating the differences between demographics voting for Clinton and Obama. Senator Claire McCaskill, an Obama supporter, is not deterred by ideas that this close and tough Democratic campaign has done any kind of irreparable damage to the party, and I think deep down, I agree. Still, I hope blacks turn out - at this point, I think they'll relish the opportunity for vote for a black candidate for President. I think Obama will be the nominee at this point. I'm kinda sad about it, not gonna lie. But, that being said, I'm done with this whole process, and once again, I'm back to thinking this is all politics as usual.

Basically, I think Senator Obama's right: real change only comes from the bottom up, not the top down. Ironically, he's running for that top position on a message of change. What does that mean? Does he think he's created a political machine here that is going to implement his just-as-moderate-as-anyone-else policy ideas from the street? If he has created a political movement here as he claims (though I do not think he has) and brought a bunch of new people into the political process, they are not going to accept anything less than a revolution with all his talk of change. If things don't change radically, he'll have some big problems, or at least those people will stop being involved in the voting part of the political process. I do not see him as the Democratic messiah. His message, though he speaks of change, is nothing out of the norm.

I'm back from New Hampshire, though now I think I'm coming down with a cold. Figures; I was exhausted yesterday so I took a personal day to get some sleep and drive back to New York with a little more rest, and now I'm getting sick. I'm going to work tomorrow - we'll see how the rest of the week goes. I really hate being sick.

Senator Clinton, who just finished speaking, sounded hoarse and tired. I wish her the best, and I'm still behind her. I have to say, I wasn't behind her idea of canceling the gas tax, but now she's saying she wants the oil companies to pay the tax. I don't know what's right. I have to admit; I'd love to see gas go back down to like $3.40 around here. I say that knowing full well that I have no choice but to pay whatever it is. I can't afford not to drive across the country, even though paying $380 to make that trek will be really, really painful. Cheaper gas won't make me drive more, nor do I think anymore that it will increase demand. After all, it's still really expensive, and all of America has no choice but to pay whatever the price to drive to work or take a vacation. The oil companies have us in a pinch. After all, I cannot ride my bike across the country to move and I cannot afford to buy a new hydrogen or biofuel car right now. So, cut the tax; what the hell. In any case, I'll be paying attention to where the superdelegates go over the coming weeks, reluctantly resigning myself to an Obama victory.

Speaking of superdelegates, I heard a great Science Friday podcast about Ironman and superhero superpowers. Apparently, they are working on a helmet that, when worn, can control a cursor on a computer screen by channeling brain power; basically, telekinetics. I'm very excited about that prospect. They took calls about people's favorite superpowers. What superpower would I want to have? I want to see into the future, specifically into what I'll be doing in 5 or 10 years. Beyond that, I think I'd like the power to "beam" myself from place to place. That would save me a lot in gas money.

Saturday, May 3, 2008

Dress Zippers Suck

I saw a Wired Magazine article featuring Sarah Silverman ranting about technology, and I decided to write my own little rant.

Dress Zippers. They suck. First, they eliminated the hooks on the top of the zippers, meaning someone HAS to help you zip up your dress. In fact, it really takes three people to put on a dress. If you try to do it yourself, it's impossible. First, no hook, meaning it takes one person to bow the zipper at the top and another to actually do the zippering so that the zipper can make it up to the top. Then, the zippers are so pathetically weak that it can't get over the seams of the dress. Really, I think they put seams on there that mess with the zippers just to get some sadistic glee - as if trying on dresses wasn't awful enough. Last year, I wound up crying. Yeah.

It went much better this time, though. Walked in after a 30-minute commute to find a dress in 15 - yes, 15 - minutes. Now, I have a dress for the wedding in two months and for this formal. I'm very excited. Now, I love JC Penny.

That's life. I'll write more later.

Friday, May 2, 2008

Update on the Obama-Wright Debaucle

Spectacular article about coverage of the Reverend Wright's comments and Obama's reactions and how it's playing in the black community. The Reverend has the worst timing, it would seem, and he's only serving to divide the community. If it gets any worse, or the Obama campaign can't put it behind them, I worry that black voters are going to lose hope and interest and stay home. Though I'm not an Obama supporter, I'm well aware that this would be devastating for the Democratic party and, more importantly, national race relations. If a popular black candidate goes down in flames thanks to the predominantly white media, whatever little faith young blacks had in the political process will be dealt a serious blow.

Thursday, May 1, 2008

My Love of History Continues

Another awesome article in the New York Times (I know - shocking that I would read the Times) about a new book by Tony Horwitz recounting completely forgotten history of the United States.

I liked being a historian. I tell myself that if I become a decent writer, perhaps I will pursue a professorship - or, more accurately, a PhD. I will reconnect with ET (initials for a friend, not the beloved fictional extraterrestrial) and see what she has to say about life as a slavish history graduate student.

Speaking of history, I just read my girlfriend's paper on Woodrow Wilson's religiosity. Apparently, his father was a big-time Presbyterian and greatly encouraged his son to be highly involved in the religion, particularly with respect to morality. Wilson's policies, though, were not focused on making the country more religious but instead on spreading morality. I don't really know how successful he was (I'm not a Wilson scholar), but I'd love to have a contemporary leader personally religious who was more interested in spreading good and improving the world than focusing his energy solely on ensuring the rise of rabid Evangelicalism.

In other news, today is May Day. My thesis research comes flying back into my head from the dark recesses of memory: this is a big holiday for workers of the world, and not just industrial ones. It commemorates the gigantic general strike in Chicago in 1886 and the Haymarket Massacre, which was a bombing that occurred at a demonstration protesting the previous day's police raid on peaceful striking workers. The demonstrators were held accountable, though anarchists always thought it was the police that framed the strikers, and four anarchists were hung. They became the "Haymarket martyrs," and the whole ugly affair gave anarchists a bad rap. They became bomb-throwing terrorists, not peaceful advocates for change through direct action. Thus, my thesis.

There were all sorts of demonstrations today in DC, the theme being immigration. Appropriate; after all, immigration really boils down to labor. Good for them; wish I could have been there. But alas... I had to work.

I think the US should celebrate workers by, I don't know, maybe NOT WORKING on May Day. I'm no day laborer, but I definitely could have used a holiday today. I think it's offensive that Americans don't celebrate their labor history the way the rest of the world does. Which brings me to the point: Americans work more days and longer hours than everyone else, and what do we have to show for it? We're fat, we're stressed, and we're a whole lot unhealthier than the rest of the developed world.